Nuclear Engineer: New cover on Unit 4 can trap hydrogen gas during criticality in fuel pool — Blast would be close to a nuclear explosion, from a practical standpoint (AUDIO)

Fairewinds Chief Engineer Arnie Gundersen, Nov. 19, 2013 (at 7:00 in): Modern fuel racks have boron surrounding the nuclear fuel, and the boron at Fukushima Daiich likely leached out over the last 2 years […] If the fuel gets too close to each other it can cause a chain reaction in the fuel pool.

Chris Harris, former licensed Senior Reactor Operator and engineer, Nov. 21, 2013 (at 34:45 in): You can have occur a complete criticality in the spent fuel pool. If you imagine the whole spent fuel pool boiling away at one time, a dazzling display of light, […] involvement where the fuel itself gets damaged, liberating hydrogen, getting contained inside the new building that they have, and that exploding. I almost believe that would be close to, or indistinguishable from, a nuclear explosion from a practical standpoint.

Maybe the cask is from a different manufacturer or supplier. A different manufacturing run or slight difference in machining of the outer casing could explain the difference in appearance. Just because it looks different doesn't mean it's fake.

If there's only one way the casks are made and appear, then I'll eat my words with humble pie.

I usually frown upon getting into faked photo conversations. It does look like the man standing in between the cask truck and the little fence has no shadow of his foot and leg. The man behind the truck has a shadow and his footing placement is similar. It's the work of the shadow government.

I do believe that the US government is withholding any help until Japan and Tepco agree to release GE of any liability. GE designed the plant in Fukushima . Made the call to put them below sea level, they even removed a hill to do it. And I think they (GE) still own the plant .

Wouldn' t that just be the frosting on the cake …. If GE did indeed do the site design/prep/construc tion, then the entire design review and permitting process within the Japanese Govt is faulty as well. I sure hope you're wrong …. but with Immelt and Obummer being pals …..

Arnie says at the beginning of the video that the placement of Fukushima Daiichi on the level of the ocean and part below sea level was done at the advice of GE and EBASCO which is a company created by GE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGa0_lxMScE
Electric Bond and Share Company
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Electric Bond and Share Company was originally a holding company that sold securities of electric utilities. It was created by General Electric in 1905. The company was restructured after the Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935. Later known as EBASCO Services, it provided engineering consulting and construction services. Among other projects EBASCO designed nuclear power plants. EBASCO was sold to Raytheon in 1993 and became part of a Raytheon subsidiary, United Engineers and Constructors.[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_Bond_and_Share_Company

Maybe the location/construction of Fukushima Daiichi and Daini was Matsutaro Shoriki's revenge against the US for subjugating Japan.

He benefited from the CIA entanglements, but he was very much a nationalist as well.

Having followed this disaster carefully, I believe that parts of Japan are far less contaminated than the Pacific Coast, especially in areas immediately west of mountain ranges. California's central valleys have not faired well, I'm convinced.

Of course, Fukushima Prefecture and other areas of northern Japan are going to be a radioactive wasteland.

I believe that the word GENOCIDE applies appropriately to a policy of endangering people and their progeny across generations through a failure to acknowledge the severity and scope of exposure.

Respectfully, anne, I can't imagine what difference it makes anymore whether the exercise in the SFP in Unit 4 is faked or if what Tepco says is true. Most can't (or sadly, won't) assure themselves of what might be the reality of the situation and it proceeds. I might agree with you (my imagination tells me that you're correct) while there's only a small exception already raised that is knowledge of malevolent secrets beyond the tools of power generation in their interest and power guard with our lives. I'm not a man given to prayer, but for the moment I see no choice and wish the best in the endeavor with hope that they, at least, respect their own lives enough and not allow self-scarifice in some great farce. I might add that it strikes me that many of our gods (and heroes, whose tragedy isn't really their death as assumed) through the ages have been self-sacrificial victims, so I've some question of even that.

Anyway, the cover is exactly that, a trap for hydrogen, and I've stated before that I had hoped that Tepco would see that point well enough and respect that aspect enough to then also use that trap to advantage. They could, at least, replace the atmosphere with nitrogen on a constant flowing basis to minimize the possibility of fires that they can't access as before. They could filter, control, and direct, somewhat, atmospheric emissions, even if the workers would need personal breathing apparatus. It'd be shameful to let hydrogen return it to square…

I sure would like to know, why unit four blew up in the first place, it should not have, can you please explain.
Did the hydrogen explosions compressed the fuel? Did the nuclear blast from unit three cause prompt criticality due to EMP? How did the hydrogen migrate to unit four from three, not from stack, low levels of radiation in filters, do not add up?. What was the actual location of new fuel bundles?
What about collecting noble gases or are they short lived and not to be worried about?

Photos— Nobody who is trying to run a scam is going to be stupid enough to mix black and white photos. One must be a file photo.

Arne is still saying the fuel racks are distorted. Where is the evidence for this? He also says the building is listing, but there is no evidence for that either. In fact, the video of the removal of a fuel assembly clearly shows that the assembly is pulled straight up, otherwise it would have swung sideways once it was clear of the rack.

Arne also goes on and on about the supposed deterioration of the boron plates. They are clad with stainless steel and there is no reason to think so.

Also, just once, it would be refreshing to get some independent confirmation that Arne "built fuel racks". There seems to be no way to confirm this. Also, he should be honest about that "chief engineer" business. He is the ONLY engineer. A bit of embellishment there which gives the impression that there is a group of engineers of which he is the "chief".

Hydrogen explosion. Where would the hydrogen come from. The hydrogen which caused the explosion was created by molten zirconium in the melting down reactors reacting with water. That can't happen anymore.

People should worry about real hazards, such as the Diablo Canyon plant which is not up to earthquake standards.

Good point, mairs. And nuclear_genie, It actually gets not-amusing when people who do not seem to have first-hand info of their own, get all wrapped up in downing the info of people who at least have a track record, expertise, and honest spade work from the start. Arnie G. doesn't lie just because you can't understand what he is saying. This gets obstructive. The problem at Fukushima don't lessen just because you're confused.

The computer controller knows where the assemblies are to the millimeter. All it would take is just a millimeter or two to throw the calculations off. I suppose the program could be altered to compensate for any tilt in the building. It would suck if the millimeter caused the rods to touch together and cause a criticality.
Maybe being happy will compensate. Best wishes to all.

Er, it looks to me like the rack is tilted a degree or so, and the extracted assembly is scraping against the left and forward edges (leaving marks on the facing side throughout the length). There is a gap on the right side between the assembly and the rack If the extracted rod is almost hanging plumb (but scraping) throughout the extraction procedure, then it won't move much when fully clear. Which is probably why the oops chose these particular assemblies to start with.

IOW I think the video shows precisely the problem Mr. G is warning us about. If the extracted rod assembly is plumb leaving the rack, that particular rack is skew as demonstrated by the interference on the front and possibly left sides and the gap on the right side. Not enough to trip the sensors monitoring drag in this case.

Yepper. Anything will hang plumb, but who knows what forces those racks underwent; continue to undergo (settling).
What forces might be exerted on an assembly undergoing extraction by the rack in case of a seismic event? Knock on wood, folks, knock on wood….

weeman, collecting the gases was exactly my point about control of the atmosphere inside that cover. It's not rocket science to do that, and minor leaks are in control are irrelevant to none at all.

Concerning your questions, those were the exceptions that I was speaking of in my first comment. Personally, I can't buy the migration of hydrogen from Unit 3. While the pictures I've seen directly after Unit 3 blew can't make me sure, it would seem that plumbing was awfully compromised for that kind of flow, and also it's rather telling that Unit 4's panels were blown out at lower levels than even Unit 3, some gone even at ground level in 4. If Unit 4 before the blow was intact, why weren't they aware of the hydrogen build-up and not venting the structure?

Given the nature of the cover, why aren't they making a stated effort to control the atmosphere inside it? It's interesting that they don't seem overly concerned with fires or the damage and lack of access fire might become. So is there something there to catch fire on a spontaneous (however that happens) basis, or has it already burned and they're just cleaning up what mess they can and generating some public-satifying PR?

You're right in my mind, about things 'adding up'. But we're obviously not party to the variables in the equation for any of it to add up. Doesn't seem Arnie has those variables, either, and he just expresses knowledge he can gain through what he's given to believe is simply a…

You do not go to all the trouble of building structure to remove spent fuel assemblies, so the question is what do they want to retrieve?, if the SFP was empty or partially uncovered, I do not see how you retrieve?, if it is the MOX fuel they are after, then it must have been stored in other pit and or that is was what burned and the SFP is not effected?
One more thing, what if the corium from unit three did not go to basement, but went sideways and flowed into basement of unit four, does anyone know if there is a link to each building, I would think.
I am a man of a million questions with no answers, but I have imagination, please excuse my ignorance.

"Chernobyl Was Transparent Compared to Fukushima": Harvey Wasserman on Ongoing Crisis
19 November 2013 Truthout
The information we were getting this summer included revelations that 300 tons of toxic water leaked in one week, and then in other news, the fact that 300 tons are leaking into the Pacific daily.
Every day, and this is for two and half years now, and there is no end in sight. It could go on for 50 years. We've already detected radiation from Fukushima off of the coast of Alaska. There was a study of 15 tuna caught off the coast of California; out of the 15 tuna caught, 15 had radiation from Fukushima.
You wouldn't want to eat this tuna. Radiation in even small doses, cesium, strontium, iodine, will bio-accumulate. If you get a relatively small dose into some seaweed, fish will come; they will eat enough seaweed that it will be significant; they will be eaten up the food chain; we're at the top of the food chain.http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/20116-chernobyl-was-transparent-compared-to-fukushima-harvey-wasserman-on-the-ongoing-crisis

nuclear_genie, I don't see the point of whether Arnie has personally physically built fuel racks. That he may have doesn't cross my mind. I've always thought of his claims as that of a manager in some capacity of a concern that built fuel racks. Has he seen racks? Yes. Is he aware of the materials in the racks? Yes. Did he have a hand in design? Maybe. When one manufactures anything one accepts variables that are outside of one's control. Are the parts and pieces of what makes up a rack what he says they are? Just like I, looking at a piece of metal on the floor that is unmarked and without true certification, tell whether it is type 304 stainless, or type 316, though in some applications, it makes the difference between something functioning to design or failure. He honestly, in every situation, can't say they are for sure. It's more a matter of use of the English language than of actual fact, like a supervisor saying 'we built x' when all the guy touced except casually were pieces of paper.

Spent approximately 1.5 hours outside today. Total bq/liter at 54cpm x 1.5 = 81 counts per minute exposure over 12-20 breath's per minute in lung liters = total exposure for the day. "We and I and Grampybone got a dose today."

LIVE FEEDS

Receive Occasional Enenews Newsletters

sending...

Name

E-mail

SUPPORT ENENews

ENENews receives no funding from anyone or anything, except 1) People who donate via the button below, and 2) Google, who pays for the two ad spots. Thanks to all who have donated or are planning on doing so, it's nice to know people appreciate your work.